Travelling People: Equality

Philip Dunne: To ask the Minister for Women and Equality what assessment has been made of the likely effects of the introduction of the new public duty in the Equality Bill to address socio-economic disadvantage on the provision of services to Travellers.

Michael Jabez Foster: The new duty will reduce the effects of socio-economic disadvantage. When local authorities and other key public bodies are making decisions of a strategic nature, such as deciding priorities and setting objectives, they will need to consider how their decisions could help to reduce the inequalities associated with socio-economic disadvantage.
	The most recent report on the Government's strategy for race equality and community cohesion "Improving Opportunity, Strengthening Society—A third progress report—February 2009", highlighted the many socio-economic disadvantages suffered by Gypsies and Travellers, so they are likely to benefit from the new duty. Copies are available in the Libraries of the House.

Class Sizes: North East

Ashok Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many children were taught in classes of more than 30 pupils in  (a) the North East,  (b) Tees Valley and  (c) Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland constituency in each of the last 10 years.

Vernon Coaker: The requested information is shown in the table:
	
		
			  Maintained primary( 1)  and state-funded secondary( 1,2 ) schools: number of pupils in classes( 3)  of more than 30 pupils—As at January each year in North East Government Office Region, Tees Valley and Middlesbrough South and East Parliamentary Constituency 
			   North East  Tees Valley( 4)  Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland 
			   Number of pupils in classes of over 30  Number of pupils in all classes  % of pupils in classes of over 30  Number of pupils in classes of over 30  Number of pupils in all classes  % of pupils in classes of over 30  Number of pupils in classes of over 30  Number of pupils in all classes  % of pupils in classes of over 30 
			 1999 75,720 389,610 19.4 21,300 109,210 19.5 2,040 14,170 14.4 
			 2000 66,050 389,990 16.9 18,110 109,000 16.6 2,030 14,060 14.4 
			 2001 57,500 387,080 14.9 16,710 106,820 15.6 1,870 13,590 13.7 
			 2002 48,470 378,170 12.8 13,410 105,950 12.7 950 13,360 7.1 
			 2003 47,770 378,370 12.6 13,440 103,830 12.9 1,660 12,810 13.0 
			 2004 46,090 372,350 12.4 12,140 101,370 12.0 1,400 12,430 11.3 
			 2005 44,240 366,680 12.1 11,180 100,440 11.1 1,150 12,230 9.4 
			 2006 43,170 359,540 12.0 11,070 98,520 11.2 1,250 12,190 10.2 
			 2007 39,010 351,140 11.1 9,610 95,800 10.0 730 11,560 6.3 
			 2008 39,240 345,100 11.4 11,010 93,580 11.8 1,070 11,480 9.3 
			 (1)( )Includes middle schools as deemed.  (2)( )Includes CTCs and academies.  (3)( )One teacher classes as taught during a single selected period in each school on the day of the census in January.  (4)( )Tees Valley is Hartlepool, Middlesbrough, Redcar and Cleveland, Stockton-on-Tees and Darlington local authorities.   Note:  Pupil numbers have been rounded to the nearest 10.   Source:  School Census 
		
	
	The table covers classes in primary and secondary schools. There is a legal limit of 30 pupils for infant classes.

Departmental Postal Services

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how much his Department has spent on services from Royal Mail in each year since it was established.

Vernon Coaker: Since the Department for Children, Schools and Families was established the amount spent on Royal Mail services has been:
	
		
			   £ 
			 2007-08 180,864.05 
			 2008-09 177,705.47 
			 2009-10 (to end June) 42,221.26

Further Education

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what recent steps the Government have taken to encourage young people to enter further education.

Iain Wright: holding answer 16 September 2009
	We are determined to ensure that as many young people as possible continue their learning beyond the age of 16 to get the qualifications and experience they need to succeed in an increasingly competitive labour market.
	Through the September Guarantee, we are providing every young person aged 16-17 with a suitable offer of a place in learning. This has helped us to make excellent progress on participation, with a record level of 88 per cent. of 16-17 year olds in education and training at the end of 2008. Additional investment of £655 million allocated in Budget 2009 has enabled the number of post-16 learning places available this academic year to increase to all time high of 1.55 million. Young people also have access to a range of financial support such as the education maintenance allowance to help them engage in learning.

Schools: Closures

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many schools have been closed for each reason for closure since 1997.

Vernon Coaker: The following table sets out the numbers of school closures, and their reason for closure in each year since 1999. We do not have reliable information about decisions made prior to 1999.
	
		
			   Reason for closure 
			   Cease to maintain  Change of religious character  Due to amalgamation  For academy  For fresh start  To allow for a new establishment  Total 
			 1999 1 — 1 — — — 2 
			 2000 12 — 96 — 8 — 116 
			 2001 26 4 193 — 3 3 229 
			 2002 31 9 180 4 1 1 226 
			 2003 36 10 177 8 5 — 236 
			 2004 54 6 191 6 7 1 265 
			 2005 39 8 211 7 7 — 272 
			 2006 41 4 224 17 3 1 290 
			 2007 45 5 270 34 3 1 358 
			 2008 49 2 193 56 1 — 301 
			 2009(1) 27 1 104 47 — — 179 
			 Total 361 49 1840 179 38 7 2,474 
			 (1) 2009 shows schools approved for closure up to 31 August 2009. 
		
	
	The data on the table is recorded on our Statutory Proposals Information (SPI) database. SPI provides information from 1999 but is only accurate from 2001, when local decision making came into force and we started recording decisions on SPI.
	There are various reasons for school closures. We categorise these under six different proposal 'types':
	"Cease to maintain" indicates cases where a school is not proposed to be established on the site of the closing school;
	"Change of religious character" is where a school must close and re-open in order to add, change or remove a religious character;
	"Due to amalgamation" indicates cases where schools are being closed and a new school established—usually on the site(s) of the closing school(s)—or where one or more closes and an existing school makes prescribed alterations e.g. enlarge, change age range etc;
	"For academy" indicates schools that are closing and are being replaced by Academies;
	"For fresh start" is where an existing school closes to be replaced by a new school under fresh start policy; and
	"To allow for a new establishment" are 'miscellaneous' closure proposals. No school has been closed under this category since 2006. (Miscellaneous closure included changing the category of a school—regulations now allow for this.)

Schools: Finance

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what the allocation for  (a) Redbridge and  (b) Waltham Forest for (i) dedicated school grant and (ii) guaranteed funding per pupil is for (A) 2009, (B) 2010 and (C) 2011; what the change in per pupil funding was in (1) cash and (2) percentage terms between 1997 and 2009; and what (x) total and (y) per pupil funding allocation for (X) Redbridge and (Y) Waltham Forest for 2009-10 is for (aa) school development grant, (bb) school standards grant, (cc) school standards grant (personalisation), (dd) ethnic minority achievement grant, (ee) extended schools, (ff) primary strategy, (gg) school lunch grant, (hh) music services, (ii) harnessing technology (ICT) and (jj) devolved formula capital.

Vernon Coaker: holding answer 16 September 2009
	 The Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) for 2008-09 to 2010-11 (indicative) for Redbridge and Waltham Forest local authorities is shown in table 1. This covers pupils aged three-15.
	
		
			  Table 1 
			  £ million 
			   DSG allocation 
			   2008-09 (final)  2009-10 (final)  2010-11 (indicative) 
			 Redbridge 173.785 184.212 195.516 
			 Waltham Forest 160.125 167.109 180.326 
		
	
	The guaranteed unit of funding for 2008-09 to 2010-11 for Redbridge and Waltham Forest local authority is shown in table 2.
	
		
			  Table 2 
			  £ 
			   Guaranteed unit of funding 
			   2008-09 (final)  2009-10 (final)  2010-11 (final) 
			 Redbridge 4,214 4,380 4,575 
			 Waltham Forest 4,584 4,747 4,940 
		
	
	Per pupil revenue funding figures for pupils aged three-19 for Redbridge and Waltham Forest local authorities for years 1997-98 and 2005-06 are shown in table 3. These figures are in cash terms.
	
		
			  Table 3 
			   Local authority revenue funding per pupil (£) 
			   1997-98  2005-06  Percentage change 
			 Redbridge 2,810 4,420 57 
			 Waltham Forest 3,080 5,060 64 
			  Notes: 1. Price Base: Cash 2. Figures reflect relevant sub-blocks of Standard Spending Assessment/Education Formula Spending (EFS) settlements and exclude the pensions transfer to EFS and LSC. 3. Total funding also includes all revenue grants in DFES departmental expenditure limits relevant to pupils aged 3-19 and exclude Education Maintenance Allowances (EMAs) and grants not allocated at LEA level. 4. The pupil numbers used to convert £ million figures to £ per pupil are those underlying the SSA/EFS settlement calculations plus PLASC three-year-old maintained pupils and estimated three to four-year-olds funded through state support in maintained and other educational institutions where these are not included in the SSA pupil numbers. 5. Rounding: Figures are rounded to the nearest £10. 6. Status: Some of the grant allocations have not been finalised. If these do change, the effect on the funding figures is expected to be minimal. 
		
	
	The revenue per pupil figures shown in table 4 are taken from the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG). They are not comparable with those for the years 1997-98 to 2005-06 (in table 3 above) because the introduction of the DSG in 2006-07 fundamentally changed how local authorities are funded.
	The 1997-98 to 2005-06 figures are based on Education Formula Spending (EFS) which formed the education part of the Local Government Finance Settlement, plus various grants. This was an assessment of what local authorities needed to fund education rather than what they spent.
	The DSG is based largely on an authority's previous spending.
	In addition, the DSG has a different coverage to EFS. EFS comprised a schools block and an LEA block (to cover LEA central functions) whereas DSG only covers the school block.
	LEA block items are still funded through DCLG's Local Government Finance Settlement but education items cannot be separately identified. Consequently, there is a break in the Department's time series as the two sets of data are not comparable.
	To provide a comparison for 2008-09 DSG, the Department have isolated the schools block equivalent funding in 2005-06 (the baseline); as described above this does not represent the totality of 'education' funding in that year.
	The per pupil revenue funding figures for 2005-06 and 2008-09 for Redbridge and Waltham Forest local authorities are provided in table 4. The figures are for all funded pupils aged three-19 and are in cash terms.
	
		
			  Table 4 
			   Local authority revenue funding per pupil (£) 
			   2005-06  2008-09  Percentage change 
			 Redbridge 4,050 4,820 19 
			 Waltham Forest 4,580 5,330 16 
			  Notes: 1. This covers funding through the Dedicated Schools Grant, School Standards Grant, School Standards Grant (Personalisation) and Standards Fund as well as funding from the Learning and Skills Council; it excludes grants which are not allocated at LA level. 2. Price Base: Cash 3. These figures are for all funded pupils aged three-19 4. Figures have been rounded to the nearest £10 5. Some of the grant allocations have not been finalised. If these do change, the effect on the funding figures is expected to be minimal. 
		
	
	The figures for Standards Funds are recorded according to allocation per authority not per pupil, the following table shows the total allocations that Redbridge and Waltham Forest have been awarded in 2009-10 for grants that the honourable member for Leyton and Wanstead requested.
	
		
			  £ 
			  Grant name  2009-10 allocation Redbridge  2009-10 allocation Waltham Forest 
			 School Development Grant 9,176,344 12,427,886 
			 School Standards Grant 7,007,793 5,505,573 
			 School Standards Grant (personalisation) 2,212,183 2,498,922 
			 Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant 3,431,578 3,539,416 
			 Extended Schools—Sustainability 724,493 674,446 
			 Extended Schools—Subsidy 179,626 175,360 
			 Extended Schools—Capital 499,804 480,031 
			 Primary Strategy: Targeted Support 810,251 1,171,770 
			 School Lunch Grant 473,777 394,829 
			 Music 342,011 386,625 
			 Harnessing Technology 873,212 766,178 
			 Devolved Formula Capital 5,551,120 4,636,216

Science: GCSE

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what proportion of pupils who achieved a GCSE in double award applied science at each grade in 2007 were educated in the  (a) maintained mainstream and  (b) the independent sector.

Vernon Coaker: All pupils at the end of key stage 4 that achieved grades in double award applied science are counted in the following table which is broken down by grade and the education sector attended by the pupil.
	
		
			  Double award applied science 
			   2007  2008 
			   Maintained  Independent  Maintained  Independent 
			  Grade  Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage 
			 A*A* 54 100.0 0 0.0 22 100.0 0 0.0 
			 A*A — — — — 62 100.0 0 0.0 
			 AA 481 99.0 5 1.0 173 100.0 0 0.0 
			 AB — — — — 449 99.8 1 0.2 
			 BB 2,588 99.4 16 0.6 1,115 99.9 1 0.1 
			 BC — — — — 2,046 100.0 1 0.0 
			 CC 8,045 99.7 24 0.3 3,515 99.9 4 0.1 
			 CD — — — — 3,094 99.8 7 0.2 
			 DD 7,793 99.8 13 0.2 2,527 99.8 4 0.2 
			 DE — — — — 2,011 99.9 2 0.1 
			 EE 5,235 99.9 4 0.1 1,664 99.9 1 0.1 
			 EF — — — — 1,265 99.9 1 0.1 
			 FF 3,076 100.0 1 0.0 863 100.0 0 0.0 
			 FG — — — — 581 99.8 1 0.2 
			 GG 1,283 100.0 0 0.0 319 99.7 1 0.3 
			  Note: The grading structure of the double award applied science changed between 2007 and 2008.

Afghanistan: Peacekeeping Operations

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many contacts there were between British forces and anti-coalition militia in Afghanistan in each month since June 2006.

John Hutton: The Ministry of Defence is currently collating and validating the data needed to answer this question. I will write to the hon. Member when his work is complete, and place a copy of my letter in the Library of the House.
	 Substantive answer from  Bob Ainsworth to Liam Fox:
	I am writing to provide you with the information promised in my predecessor's holding replies to your Parliamentary Questions regarding contacts between British forces and anti-coalition militia in Afghanistan on 24 February 2009, (Official Report, column 520W).
	The Ministry of Defence has recently completed a review of the data required to answer this question, and has revised the manner in which we classify and present data to ensure consistency.
	The numbers of troops in contact events (regardless of the instigator) involving the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and insurgents in Helmand province as part of Task Force Helmand for each complete month from June 2006 to February 2009 for which verified data is available are shown below.
	
		
			   2006( 1)  2007( 1)  2008( 1)  2009( 1) 
			 January — 60 70 180 
			 February — 100 70 180 
			 March — 140 80 — 
			 April — 70 50 — 
			 May — 120 60 — 
			 June 10 110 80 — 
			 July 120 130 110 — 
			 August 100 130 200 — 
			 September 100 130 180 — 
			 October 40 90 170 — 
			 November 40 110 200 — 
			 December 50 130 220 — 
			 (1) Rounded to the nearest 10. 
		
	
	ISAF forces operating in Helmand come from a number of different nations, which often operate closely alongside each other and alongside Afghan Army and Police units. Without undertaking a detailed assessment of each engagement, it is not possible precisely to define in every case whether an attack was aimed at UK forces, at our ISAF partners, or against Afghan units. Data is therefore collected on the number of incidents involving ISAF forces in Helmand without attempting to identify the nationality of the forces actually being attacked. The environment in which forces are operating makes it extremely difficult precisely to distinguish between incidents initiated by insurgent forces and those initiated by ISAF.
	This data is based on information derived from a number of sources and can only be an estimate, not least because of the difficulties in ensuring a consistent interpretation of the basis for collating statistics in a complex fast-moving multinational operational environment.
	I hope that the above information addresses your concerns on this matter.
	I will place a copy of this letter in the Library of the House.

Armed Forces: Medical Services

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many personnel from the Royal Naval Medical Services were based in  (a) Scotland,  (b) Wales,  (c) England,  (d) Northern Ireland and  (e) other countries in each of the last five years.

Kevan Jones: The number of Royal Naval Medical Service personnel based in each location as at 1 April each year is provided in the following table. The data before 2007 can be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	
		
			   2007  2008  2009 
			 Scotland 120 110 130 
			 Wales 0 0 0 
			 England 1,450 1,480 1,430 
			 Northern Ireland (1)— (1)— (1)— 
			 Other countries(2) 110 70 70 
			 (1 )Fewer than five.  (2 )Other countries also includes Cyprus and Germany.   Notes:  1. Due to ongoing validation of data from the Joint Personnel Administration System all strength statistics are provisional and subject to review.  2. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.

Armed Forces: Medical Services

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 
	(1)  how many  (a) psychologists,  (b) psychiatrists,  (c) mental health nurses and  (d) occupational therapists in Defence Medical Services have been employed in (i) Scotland, (ii) England, (iii) Wales, (iv) Northern Ireland and (v) other countries in each year since 1997;
	(2)  how much has been spent on  (a) psychologists,  (b) psychiatrists,  (c) mental health nurses and  (d) occupational therapists by the Defence Medical Services in (i) Scotland, (ii) England, (iii) Wales, (iv) Northern Ireland and (v) other countries in each year since 1997.

Kevan Jones: holding answer 16 September 2009
	 The majority of mental health personnel are employed in MOD's 15 Departments of Community Mental Health (DCMHs) in the UK, (with additional centres in Germany, Cyprus and Gibraltar), with a small number at other MOD locations. The DCMHs are located in areas of major military population, and include 11 in England, three in Scotland and one in Northern Ireland.
	The number of personnel employed in the specified regions as at July 2009 are provided in the table. These include both military and civilian personnel.
	
		
			  Location  Psychologists  Psychiatrists( 1)  Mental Health Nurses  Occupational Therapists (Mental Health( 2) 
			 England 10 22 85 — 
			 Scotland 1 1.5 5 — 
			 Wales — — — — 
			 Northern Ireland — 0.5 3 — 
			 Other 1 4 24 3 
			 Total 12 28 117 3 
			 (1) One individual works part-time at two separate DCMHs. These are shown as "0.5" at each location.  (2) Specialised Occupational Therapists (Mental Health) are only employed in DCMHs in Germany. Elsewhere, this function is undertaken by mental health nurses. 
		
	
	Historical figures back to 1997 are not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	Funding provision is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Departmental Budgets

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much and what proportion of his Department's science, innovation and technology budget was spent in Scotland in each year since 1997.

Kevan Jones: holding answer 9 September 2009
	Direct contract payments made from the Science Innovation Technology (SIT) budget on equipment and non-equipment contracts and those where the primary work was identified as being undertaken in Scotland are shown in the following table.
	
		
			  VAT Exclusive: £ million 
			   Total Expenditure in Year - Scotland  Total Expenditure in Year -SIT  Proportion of SIT Expenditure in Year in Scotland (%) 
			 2003-04 4 392 1.0 
			 2004-05 9 471 1.9 
			 2005-06 10 500 2.0 
			 2006-07 11 488 2.3 
			 2007-08 12 531 2.3 
			 2008-09 10 509 2.0 
			  Note: Rounded to the nearest £ million 
		
	
	Requested information prior to 2003-04 is not available and can only be provided at disproportionate cost. Staff costs are not included. There may also be further work that was carried out in Scotland, but location data is not available on central records. However, this element is likely to be very small.

Departmental Manpower

Peter Bone: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many  (a) armed service personnel and  (b) administrative staff were employed by his Department in each year since 1997.

Kevan Jones: The number of Armed Forces and Civilian personnel employed in each year since 1997 is provided in the table.
	This information can also be found in the UK Defence Statistics table 2.1, "Recent trends in Service and civilian personnel strengths at 1 April each year", at the following DASA website
	http://www.dasa.mod.uk.
	
		
			  Thousand: FTE 
			   1997  1998  1999  2000  2001 *  2002 *  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007 *  2008 *  2009 
			 Service personnel(1) 215.1 214.3 213.2 212.7 211.2 210.8 213.5 213.3 206.9 201.4 (2)196.1 (2)193.1 (2)194.7 
			 UK Regulars 210.8 210.1 208.6 207.6 205.7 204.7 206.9 207.0 201.1 195.9 (2)190.4 (2)187.1 (2)188.4 
			 FTRS — 0.1 0.6 1.0 1.4 2.0 2.5 2.2 1.7 1.5 1.6 (2)1.8 (2)2.1 
			 Gurkhas(3) 4.3 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.7 (2)3.7 (2)3.9 (2)3.9 
			 Locally entered/ engaged(3) —(4) 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 
			 Civilian Level 0(5,6) 133.3 126.3 123.0 121.3 *118.2 110.1 107.6 109.0 108.5 103.4 97.7 89.5 86.6 
			 Civilian Level l(7) 101.9 97.1 94.1 91.9 86.0 83.6 81.5 82.2 82.0 78.1 73.8 69.0 66.4 
			 Trading Funds(6) 15.5 14.0 14.0 14.5 18.8 12.4 12.2 11.4 10.8 10.7 10.1 9.2 9.6 
			 Locally Engaged Civilians 15.9 15.2 14.9 14.8 13.3 14.1 13.8 15.4 15.7 14.5 13.8 11.2 10.5 
			 * Denotes discontinuity in time series. (1) Data for the Home Service of the Royal Irish Regiment is excluded from this table. The Home Service of the Royal Irish Regiment was officially disbanded on 31 March 2008. (2) Denotes provisional - Due to ongoing validation of data from the Joint Personnel Administration System, Service strength statistics for 1 April 2007 onwards are provisional and subject to review. (3) Gurkhas are included in the locally entered service personnel figures until 1997 after which they are shown separately. (4) Denotes brace. (5) Civilian Level 0 - This contains all those at Level 1 plus Trading Funds and Locally Engaged Civilians. (6) The following changes have affected the continuity of the civilian data: In Financial Year 2001-02 the QinetiQ portion of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (8,000) was established as a private company. At 1 April 2008 the Defence Aviation Repair Agency and the Army Based Repair Organisation merged to form the Defence Support Group and around 1,000 personnel transferred to the Vector Aerospace Corporation. (7) Civilian Level 1 - Permanent and casual civilian personnel and Royal Fleet Auxiliaries, but excludes Trading Funds and Locally Engaged Civilians  Notes:  1. All figures are rounded to the nearest 100. 2. Totals and subtotals have been rounded separately and so may not equal the sum of their rounded parts.  Source: DASA (Quad-Service)

Guided Weapons: Testing

Angus MacNeil: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many missile tests took place at Hebrides Range in  (a) 2008,  (b) 2009 and  (c) 2010; and what missiles were tested in each test.

Kevan Jones: holding answer 16 September 2009
	Details of missile testing at the Hebrides Range during 2008 and 2009 to date are as follows:
	
		
			   Missile details  Number of missile tests 
			  2008 Rapier 5 
			  Sea Sparrow—conducted on behalf of Denmark 1 
			  Sea Dart 1 
			  HVM—High Velocity Missile 1 
			  AMRAAM—Advanced Medium Range Air-Air Missile 1 
			
			  2009 Rapier 3 
			  Sea Dart 1 
			  BVRAAM—Beyond Visual Range Air-Air Missile 1 
			  Brimstone 1 
		
	
	In addition, a further trial was conducted at the Hebrides Range during 2009, but I am withholding the details as disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of the armed forces.
	Details of missile tests currently planned for the remainder of 2009 and 2010 are as follows:
	
		
			   Missile Details  Number of Missile Tests 
			  2009 Rapier 1 
			  BVRAAM—Beyond Visual Range Air-Air Missile 2 
			
			  2010 AMRAAM—Advanced Medium Range Air-Air Missile 2 
			  ASRAAM—Advanced Short-Range Air-Air Missile 1 
			  Rapier 2 
			  Sea Viper 2 
			  Sea Dart 1 
			  BVRAAM—Beyond Visual Range Air-Air Missile 1